Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Thursday, 6 February 2020 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA THURSDAY, 6 FEBRUARY 2020

HOBART

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
ABM

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Damian John Lipscombe

For Trial
J T T
(part-heard)

10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Mark Anthony Bell

4:15 p.m.
For Bail Application
Daniel James Nash Spong

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Todd Andrew Tatnell
(Part-heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Sentence
Mitchell John Campbell
Brett Langdon Wescombe

For Directions Hearing
Christopher Robert Condon

For Directions Hearing via video link to
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Stephen John Edwards
Robert David Edwards

Court 3, Salamanca Place Hobart
via video link to Court 2,
Cameron Street Launceston
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15am
Christopher Warrington Thompson v Launceston City Council
r415 Directions Hearing

Archana Brammall v Vincent Alexander Bell
R414 Directions Hearing

In the Matter of the Estate of the Late Robert Philip Jones:
Jodie Jones v Bradley Robert Jones
Directions Hearing

Thomas John Mahoney v Motor Accidents Insurance Board
Compulsory Conference/Set Down for Hearing

10:30am
Steven McGhee v Meander Valley Council
Application for vacation of hearing date

Court 3, Salamanca Place Hobart
11:00 am
Michael John Coleman v David Arthur Cuthbertson
Hearing
LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial
KPM

(Part-heard)

4:15p.m.
For Bail Application
Brody Reginald Costello

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
For Directions Hearing via video link from
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Stephen John Edwards
Robert David Edwards

Court 2, Cameron Street Launceston
via video link from Court 3,
Salamanca Place Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15am
Christopher Warrington Thompson v Launceston City Council
r415 Directions Hearing

Archana Brammall v Vincent Alexander Bell
R414 Directions Hearing

In the Matter of the Estate of the Late Robert Philip Jones:
Jodie Jones v Bradley Robert Jones
Directions Hearing

Thomas John Mahoney v Motor Accidents Insurance Board
Compulsory Conference/Set Down for Hearing

10:30am
Steven McGhee v Meander Valley Council
Application for vacation of hearing date
BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Witness on Final Notice

4:00 p.m.
For Mention
Corey Douglas Ryan

4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
to Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
ABM

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a number of cases on Thursday, 6 February 2020. These cases ranged from criminal to civil matters, with some involving directions hearings, bail applications, and trials. Among the cases listed was a criminal trial for Damian John Lipscombe, a directions hearing for Mark Anthony Bell, and a bail application for Daniel James Nash Spong. The court also heard a directions hearing in the matter of the estate of the late Robert Philip Jones, involving a dispute between Jodie Jones and Bradley Robert Jones.

The legal issues that the court was required to decide in these cases varied greatly, depending on the nature of each case. In criminal matters, the court had to consider the admissibility of evidence, the rights of the accused, and the appropriate sentence for the offence committed. In civil matters, the court had to consider the validity of legal claims, the interpretation of contracts or wills, and the appropriate remedy for the aggrieved party.

The court's reasoning and outcome in each case would have been informed by the specific facts and legal arguments presented. In criminal cases, the court would have considered the evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defence, as well as any legal principles or precedents that were relevant to the case. In civil cases, the court would have considered the legal arguments and evidence presented by both parties, as well as any relevant laws or precedents. The court's decision in each case would have been based on a careful analysis of the facts and law, with the aim of achieving a just and fair outcome for all parties involved.

In some cases, the court may have made orders for further directions hearings, trials, or other legal proceedings. In criminal cases, the court may have ordered a trial date or further evidence to be presented. In civil cases, the court may have ordered a trial or hearing date, or made orders for the parties to exchange further evidence or legal arguments. These orders would have been designed to ensure that the case was resolved in a timely and efficient manner, while also ensuring that all parties had a fair opportunity to present their case.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Thursday, 6 February 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established